A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE TO SPECIAL RELATIVITY



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 16th 10, 10:26 AM posted to sci.logic,alt.philosophy,sci.astro,sci.math
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE TO SPECIAL RELATIVITY

Theoretically, the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment can
be obtained by assuming that:

(A) The speed of light varies with the speed of the light source (c'=c
+v); the principle of relativity is correct; there are no miracles
(length contraction, time dilation).

(B) Einstein's 1905 light postulate (c'=c) is correct; the principle
of relativity is correct; there are miracles (length contraction, time
dilation).

There is no reasonable third alternative. That is, Newton's emission
theory of light with its constitutive equation c'=c+v is the ONLY
alternative to special relativity. Moreover, the emission theory is
TRUE and special relativity FALSE unless one finds natural that a
long train can be trapped inside a short tunnel, an 80m long pole can
be trapped inside a 40m long barn and a bug can be both dead and
alive:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSRIy...related&search

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...barn_pole.html
"These are the props. You own a barn, 40m long, with automatic doors
at either end, that can be opened and closed simultaneously by a
switch. You also have a pole, 80m long, which of course won't fit in
the barn. Now someone takes the pole and tries to run (at nearly the
speed of light) through the barn with the pole horizontal. Special
Relativity (SR) says that a moving object is contracted in the
direction of motion: this is called the Lorentz Contraction. So, if
the pole is set in motion lengthwise, then it will contract in the
reference frame of a stationary observer.....So, as the pole passes
through the barn, there is an instant when it is completely within the
barn. At that instant, you close both doors simultaneously, with your
switch. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least
momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn. The
runner emerges from the far door unscathed.....If the doors are kept
shut the rod will obviously smash into the barn door at one end. If
the door withstands this the leading end of the rod will come to rest
in the frame of reference of the stationary observer. There can be no
such thing as a rigid rod in relativity so the trailing end will not
stop immediately and the rod will be compressed beyond the amount it
was Lorentz contracted. If it does not explode under the strain and it
is sufficiently elastic it will come to rest and start to spring back
to its natural shape but since it is too big for the barn the other
end is now going to crash into the back door and the rod will be
trapped in a compressed state inside the barn."

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../bugrivet.html
"The bug-rivet paradox is a variation on the twin paradox and is
similar to the pole-barn paradox.....The end of the rivet hits the
bottom of the hole before the head of the rivet hits the wall. So it
looks like the bug is squashed.....All this is nonsense from the bug's
point of view. The rivet head hits the wall when the rivet end is just
0.35 cm down in the hole! The rivet doesn't get close to the
bug....The paradox is not resolved."

Pentcho Valev

  #2  
Old February 16th 10, 06:52 PM posted to sci.logic,alt.philosophy,sci.astro,sci.math
spudnik
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 220
Default THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE TO SPECIAL RELATIVITY

Michelson-Morley not null; just say, Duh!

thus:
most of Russell;'s lagubrious paradoxes are perilinguistic,
lacking the element (or variable) of time; are they not?

thus:
of course, there is a base-one;
what is it's digital counter, by induction on base-ten?
in factorial base, it has n digits; eh?

In base 1, the factorial n! has n! digits.
[OK I realize there's no "base 1"...]


thus:
sea-level is not rising, globally --
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.co...rInterview.pdf
-- and warming is mostly equatorial. however,
there is massive loss of soil, and that might change *relative* sea-
level,
in some locations, as well as dysplace some sea!

thus quoth:
Let’s take a look at the complexity of polar bear life. First, the
polar bear has been around for about 250,000 years, having survived
both an Ice Age, and the last Interglacial period (130,000 years ago),
when there was virtually no ice at the North Pole. Clearly, polar
bears have adapted to the changing environment, as evidenced by their
presence today.
(This fact alone makes the polar bear smarter than Al Gore and the
other global warming alarmists. Perhaps the polar bear survived the
last Interglacial because it did not have computer climate models that
said polar bears should not have survived!)
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.co...polarbears.pdf
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.co...l_Warming.html

thus:
the photographic record that I saw,
in some rather eclectic compendium of Einsteinmania,
seemed to show quite a "bending" effect, I must say;
not that the usual interpretation is correct, though.

Nude Scientist said:
"Enter another piece of luck for Einstein. We now know that the light-
bending effect was actually too small for Eddington to have discerned


--Another Flower for Einstein:
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.co...odynamics.html

--les OEuvres!
http://wlym.com

--Stop Cheeny, Rice & the ICC in Sudan;
no more Anglo-american quagmires!
http://larouchepub.com/pr/2010/100204rice

  #3  
Old February 17th 10, 03:16 AM posted to sci.logic,alt.philosophy,sci.astro,sci.math
John Jones[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 123
Default THE BIG TITS EMPORIUM! SEND CREDIT CARD DETAILS AND SEE LOTS OF BIGTITS. WHORR.

Pentcho Valev wrote:
Theoretically, the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment can
be obtained by assuming that:

(A) The speed of light varies with the speed of the light source (c'=c
+v); the principle of relativity is correct; there are no miracles
(length contraction, time dilation).

(B) Einstein's 1905 light postulate (c'=c) is correct; the principle
of relativity is correct; there are miracles (length contraction, time
dilation).

There is no reasonable third alternative. That is, Newton's emission
theory of light with its constitutive equation c'=c+v is the ONLY
alternative to special relativity. Moreover, the emission theory is
TRUE and special relativity FALSE unless one finds natural that a
long train can be trapped inside a short tunnel, an 80m long pole can
be trapped inside a 40m long barn and a bug can be both dead and
alive:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSRIy...related&search

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...barn_pole.html
"These are the props. You own a barn, 40m long, with automatic doors
at either end, that can be opened and closed simultaneously by a
switch. You also have a pole, 80m long, which of course won't fit in
the barn. Now someone takes the pole and tries to run (at nearly the
speed of light) through the barn with the pole horizontal. Special
Relativity (SR) says that a moving object is contracted in the
direction of motion: this is called the Lorentz Contraction. So, if
the pole is set in motion lengthwise, then it will contract in the
reference frame of a stationary observer.....So, as the pole passes
through the barn, there is an instant when it is completely within the
barn. At that instant, you close both doors simultaneously, with your
switch. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least
momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn. The
runner emerges from the far door unscathed.....If the doors are kept
shut the rod will obviously smash into the barn door at one end. If
the door withstands this the leading end of the rod will come to rest
in the frame of reference of the stationary observer. There can be no
such thing as a rigid rod in relativity so the trailing end will not
stop immediately and the rod will be compressed beyond the amount it
was Lorentz contracted. If it does not explode under the strain and it
is sufficiently elastic it will come to rest and start to spring back
to its natural shape but since it is too big for the barn the other
end is now going to crash into the back door and the rod will be
trapped in a compressed state inside the barn."

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../bugrivet.html
"The bug-rivet paradox is a variation on the twin paradox and is
similar to the pole-barn paradox.....The end of the rivet hits the
bottom of the hole before the head of the rivet hits the wall. So it
looks like the bug is squashed.....All this is nonsense from the bug's
point of view. The rivet head hits the wall when the rivet end is just
0.35 cm down in the hole! The rivet doesn't get close to the
bug....The paradox is not resolved."

Pentcho Valev

  #4  
Old February 17th 10, 03:55 AM posted to sci.logic,alt.philosophy,sci.astro,sci.math
Mike Terry
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE TO SPECIAL RELATIVITY

"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
...
Theoretically, the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment can
be obtained by assuming that:

(A) The speed of light varies with the speed of the light source (c'=c
+v); the principle of relativity is correct; there are no miracles
(length contraction, time dilation).

(B) Einstein's 1905 light postulate (c'=c) is correct; the principle
of relativity is correct; there are miracles (length contraction, time
dilation).

There is no reasonable third alternative. That is, Newton's emission
theory of light with its constitutive equation c'=c+v is the ONLY
alternative to special relativity. Moreover, the emission theory is
TRUE and special relativity FALSE unless one finds natural that a
long train can be trapped inside a short tunnel, an 80m long pole can
be trapped inside a 40m long barn


...in the sense described below it can be..

and a bug can be both dead and
alive:


The bug can't be both dead and alive (quantum effects aside!), so if the
article below is claiming this it is wrong...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSRIy...related&search

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...barn_pole.html
"These are the props. You own a barn, 40m long, with automatic doors
at either end, that can be opened and closed simultaneously by a
switch. You also have a pole, 80m long, which of course won't fit in
the barn. Now someone takes the pole and tries to run (at nearly the
speed of light) through the barn with the pole horizontal. Special
Relativity (SR) says that a moving object is contracted in the
direction of motion: this is called the Lorentz Contraction. So, if
the pole is set in motion lengthwise, then it will contract in the
reference frame of a stationary observer.....So, as the pole passes
through the barn, there is an instant when it is completely within the
barn. At that instant, you close both doors simultaneously, with your
switch. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least
momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn. The
runner emerges from the far door unscathed.....If the doors are kept
shut the rod will obviously smash into the barn door at one end. If
the door withstands this the leading end of the rod will come to rest
in the frame of reference of the stationary observer. There can be no
such thing as a rigid rod in relativity so the trailing end will not
stop immediately and the rod will be compressed beyond the amount it
was Lorentz contracted. If it does not explode under the strain and it
is sufficiently elastic it will come to rest and start to spring back
to its natural shape but since it is too big for the barn the other
end is now going to crash into the back door and the rod will be
trapped in a compressed state inside the barn."


...so no problem from either the barn owner's perspective or the runner's
perspective. Or are you claiming there is some internal contradiction in
the scenario?


http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../bugrivet.html
"The bug-rivet paradox is a variation on the twin paradox and is
similar to the pole-barn paradox.....The end of the rivet hits the
bottom of the hole before the head of the rivet hits the wall. So it
looks like the bug is squashed.....All this is nonsense from the bug's
point of view. The rivet head hits the wall when the rivet end is just
0.35 cm down in the hole! The rivet doesn't get close to the
bug....The paradox is not resolved."


Maybe the author of the article does not know how to resolve this, but it
seems to me just another variation of the pole-barn paradox - you need to be
careful that the order of events in the two frames are going to be
different. (The events being the squashing of the bug and the rivet head
hitting the wall. Yes - I'm sorry to have to tell you that the bug gets
squashed and will be "dead", not "both dead and alive" as you seem to think!
:-)

Mike.


Pentcho Valev



  #5  
Old February 17th 10, 07:24 AM posted to sci.logic,alt.philosophy,sci.astro,sci.math
Arindam Banerjee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE TO SPECIAL RELATIVITY


"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
...
Theoretically, the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment can
be obtained by assuming that:

(A) The speed of light varies with the speed of the light source (c'=c
+v); the principle of relativity is correct; there are no miracles
(length contraction, time dilation).

(B) Einstein's 1905 light postulate (c'=c) is correct; the principle
of relativity is correct; there are miracles (length contraction, time
dilation).

There is no reasonable third alternative. That is, Newton's emission
theory of light with its constitutive equation c'=c+v is the ONLY
alternative to special relativity. Moreover, the emission theory is
TRUE and special relativity FALSE unless one finds natural that a
long train can be trapped inside a short tunnel, an 80m long pole can
be trapped inside a 40m long barn and a bug can be both dead and
alive:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSRIy...related&search

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...barn_pole.html
"These are the props. You own a barn, 40m long, with automatic doors
at either end, that can be opened and closed simultaneously by a
switch. You also have a pole, 80m long, which of course won't fit in
the barn. Now someone takes the pole and tries to run (at nearly the
speed of light) through the barn with the pole horizontal. Special
Relativity (SR) says that a moving object is contracted in the
direction of motion: this is called the Lorentz Contraction. So, if
the pole is set in motion lengthwise, then it will contract in the
reference frame of a stationary observer.....So, as the pole passes
through the barn, there is an instant when it is completely within the
barn. At that instant, you close both doors simultaneously, with your
switch. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least
momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn. The
runner emerges from the far door unscathed.....If the doors are kept
shut the rod will obviously smash into the barn door at one end. If
the door withstands this the leading end of the rod will come to rest
in the frame of reference of the stationary observer. There can be no
such thing as a rigid rod in relativity so the trailing end will not
stop immediately and the rod will be compressed beyond the amount it
was Lorentz contracted. If it does not explode under the strain and it
is sufficiently elastic it will come to rest and start to spring back
to its natural shape but since it is too big for the barn the other
end is now going to crash into the back door and the rod will be
trapped in a compressed state inside the barn."

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../bugrivet.html
"The bug-rivet paradox is a variation on the twin paradox and is
similar to the pole-barn paradox.....The end of the rivet hits the
bottom of the hole before the head of the rivet hits the wall. So it
looks like the bug is squashed.....All this is nonsense from the bug's
point of view. The rivet head hits the wall when the rivet end is just
0.35 cm down in the hole! The rivet doesn't get close to the
bug....The paradox is not resolved."

Pentcho Valev


Once we throw out the ******** SR theories once and for all, we can do some
REAL engineering leading to great and currently unbelievable products from
new and correct physics. Like, asking our *viman* to take us to the moon,
for a joyride. Rest upon some high mountain peak, waltz with the fish
beneath the waves. Will happen, don't know when, for the relativists have
all the power and money and academia and media support, still.

Just saw the movie "Transformers". Now this is the very first movie where
the hallowed SR crap is rightly being held for the nonsense it actually is;
the hero makes a fool out of the e=mcc-breathing pompous professor. A
hopeful sign!

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee.



Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee.


  #6  
Old February 17th 10, 08:33 AM posted to sci.logic,alt.philosophy,sci.astro,sci.math
Bappa
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE TO SPECIAL RELATIVITY

On Feb 17, 5:24*pm, "Arindam Banerjee" wrote:
"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message

...





Theoretically, the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment can
be obtained by assuming that:


(A) The speed of light varies with the speed of the light source (c'=c
+v); the principle of relativity is correct; there are no miracles
(length contraction, time dilation).


(B) Einstein's 1905 light postulate (c'=c) is correct; the principle
of relativity is correct; there are miracles (length contraction, time
dilation).


There is no reasonable third alternative. That is, Newton's emission
theory of light with its constitutive equation c'=c+v is the ONLY
alternative to special relativity. Moreover, the emission theory is
TRUE *and special relativity FALSE unless one finds natural that a
long train can be trapped inside a short tunnel, an 80m long pole can
be trapped inside a 40m long barn and a bug can be both dead and
alive:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSRIy...related&search


http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...barn_pole.html
"These are the props. You own a barn, 40m long, with automatic doors
at either end, that can be opened and closed simultaneously by a
switch. You also have a pole, 80m long, which of course won't fit in
the barn. Now someone takes the pole and tries to run (at nearly the
speed of light) through the barn with the pole horizontal. Special
Relativity (SR) says that a moving object is contracted in the
direction of motion: this is called the Lorentz Contraction. So, if
the pole is set in motion lengthwise, then it will contract in the
reference frame of a stationary observer.....So, as the pole passes
through the barn, there is an instant when it is completely within the
barn. At that instant, you close both doors simultaneously, with your
switch. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least
momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn. The
runner emerges from the far door unscathed.....If the doors are kept
shut the rod will obviously smash into the barn door at one end. If
the door withstands this the leading end of the rod will come to rest
in the frame of reference of the stationary observer. There can be no
such thing as a rigid rod in relativity so the trailing end will not
stop immediately and the rod will be compressed beyond the amount it
was Lorentz contracted. If it does not explode under the strain and it
is sufficiently elastic it will come to rest and start to spring back
to its natural shape but since it is too big for the barn the other
end is now going to crash into the back door and the rod will be
trapped in a compressed state inside the barn."


http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../bugrivet.html
"The bug-rivet paradox is a variation on the twin paradox and is
similar to the pole-barn paradox.....The end of the rivet hits the
bottom of the hole before the head of the rivet hits the wall. So it
looks like the bug is squashed.....All this is nonsense from the bug's
point of view. The rivet head hits the wall when the rivet end is just
0.35 cm down in the hole! The rivet doesn't get close to the
bug....The paradox is not resolved."


Pentcho Valev


Once we throw out the ******** SR theories once and for all, we can do some
REAL engineering leading to great and currently unbelievable products from
new and correct physics. *Like, asking our *viman* to take us to the moon,
for a joyride. *Rest upon some high mountain peak, waltz with the fish
beneath the waves. *Will happen, don't know when, for the relativists have
all the power and money and academia and media support, still.

Just saw the movie "Transformers". *Now this is the very first movie where
the hallowed SR crap is rightly being held for the nonsense it actually is;
the hero makes a fool out of the e=mcc-breathing pompous professor. *A
hopeful sign!


Since the public are morons, this is just what they need for
scientific enlightenment!

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee.

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


  #7  
Old February 17th 10, 09:25 AM posted to sci.logic,alt.philosophy,sci.astro,sci.math
Androcles[_27_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 96
Default THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE TO SPECIAL RELATIVITY


"Mike Terry" wrote in message
...
"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
...
Theoretically, the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment can
be obtained by assuming that:

(A) The speed of light varies with the speed of the light source (c'=c
+v); the principle of relativity is correct; there are no miracles
(length contraction, time dilation).

(B) Einstein's 1905 light postulate (c'=c) is correct; the principle
of relativity is correct; there are miracles (length contraction, time
dilation).

There is no reasonable third alternative. That is, Newton's emission
theory of light with its constitutive equation c'=c+v is the ONLY
alternative to special relativity. Moreover, the emission theory is
TRUE and special relativity FALSE unless one finds natural that a
long train can be trapped inside a short tunnel, an 80m long pole can
be trapped inside a 40m long barn


..in the sense described below it can be..

and a bug can be both dead and
alive:


The bug can't be both dead and alive (quantum effects aside!), so if the
article below is claiming this it is wrong...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSRIy...related&search

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...barn_pole.html
"These are the props. You own a barn, 40m long, with automatic doors
at either end, that can be opened and closed simultaneously by a
switch. You also have a pole, 80m long, which of course won't fit in
the barn. Now someone takes the pole and tries to run (at nearly the
speed of light) through the barn with the pole horizontal. Special
Relativity (SR) says that a moving object is contracted in the
direction of motion: this is called the Lorentz Contraction. So, if
the pole is set in motion lengthwise, then it will contract in the
reference frame of a stationary observer.....So, as the pole passes
through the barn, there is an instant when it is completely within the
barn. At that instant, you close both doors simultaneously, with your
switch. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least
momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn. The
runner emerges from the far door unscathed.....If the doors are kept
shut the rod will obviously smash into the barn door at one end. If
the door withstands this the leading end of the rod will come to rest
in the frame of reference of the stationary observer. There can be no
such thing as a rigid rod in relativity so the trailing end will not
stop immediately and the rod will be compressed beyond the amount it
was Lorentz contracted. If it does not explode under the strain and it
is sufficiently elastic it will come to rest and start to spring back
to its natural shape but since it is too big for the barn the other
end is now going to crash into the back door and the rod will be
trapped in a compressed state inside the barn."


..so no problem from either the barn owner's perspective or the runner's
perspective. Or are you claiming there is some internal contradiction in
the scenario?


Yes. According to the algebra of the theory, moving poles stretch/expand,
they do not shrink/contract. Division by something less than one will
increase
the quotient, 2 = 1/0.5.

Relativity (SR) says that a moving object is expanded in the direction
of motion, contrary to Baez's lying claim.

All crackpot theoretical physicists are failed mathematicians.

  #8  
Old February 18th 10, 03:40 AM posted to sci.logic,alt.philosophy,sci.astro,sci.math
Big Red Jeff Rubard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE TO SPECIAL RELATIVITY


On Feb 17, 12:25 am, "Androcles"
wrote:

All crackpot theoretical physicists are failed mathematicians.


Pencho: Dick Vitale's prophecy has come true: And then they "8"! /No
way/, right?
/For the People/, though!
  #9  
Old February 18th 10, 03:54 AM posted to sci.logic,alt.philosophy,sci.astro,sci.math
Immortalist
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 83
Default THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE TO SPECIAL RELATIVITY

On Feb 16, 1:26*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
Theoretically, the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment can
be obtained by assuming that:

(A) The speed of light varies with the speed of the light source (c'=c
+v); the principle of relativity is correct; there are no miracles
(length contraction, time dilation).

(B) Einstein's 1905 light postulate (c'=c) is correct; the principle
of relativity is correct; there are miracles (length contraction, time
dilation).

There is no reasonable third alternative. That is, Newton's emission
theory of light with its constitutive equation c'=c+v is the ONLY
alternative to special relativity. Moreover, the emission theory is
TRUE *and special relativity FALSE unless one finds natural that a
long train can be trapped inside a short tunnel, an 80m long pole can
be trapped inside a 40m long barn and a bug can be both dead and
alive:


Wouldn't some pole traveling at the speed of light have quite a bit of
momentum? I think you need to revise the statement into a hypothetical
"If a barn was strong enough to stop a pole moving at the speed of
light the..."

Reminds me of some of this newer science fiction where they figure out
how to fire weapons at a ship traveling the speed of light.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Void_Trilogy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSRIy...related&search

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...barn_pole.html
"These are the props. You own a barn, 40m long, with automatic doors
at either end, that can be opened and closed simultaneously by a
switch. You also have a pole, 80m long, which of course won't fit in
the barn. Now someone takes the pole and tries to run (at nearly the
speed of light) through the barn with the pole horizontal. Special
Relativity (SR) says that a moving object is contracted in the
direction of motion: this is called the Lorentz Contraction. So, if
the pole is set in motion lengthwise, then it will contract in the
reference frame of a stationary observer.....So, as the pole passes
through the barn, there is an instant when it is completely within the
barn. At that instant, you close both doors simultaneously, with your
switch. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least
momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn. The
runner emerges from the far door unscathed.....If the doors are kept
shut the rod will obviously smash into the barn door at one end. If
the door withstands this the leading end of the rod will come to rest
in the frame of reference of the stationary observer. There can be no
such thing as a rigid rod in relativity so the trailing end will not
stop immediately and the rod will be compressed beyond the amount it
was Lorentz contracted. If it does not explode under the strain and it
is sufficiently elastic it will come to rest and start to spring back
to its natural shape but since it is too big for the barn the other
end is now going to crash into the back door and the rod will be
trapped in a compressed state inside the barn."

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../bugrivet.html
"The bug-rivet paradox is a variation on the twin paradox and is
similar to the pole-barn paradox.....The end of the rivet hits the
bottom of the hole before the head of the rivet hits the wall. So it
looks like the bug is squashed.....All this is nonsense from the bug's
point of view. The rivet head hits the wall when the rivet end is just
0.35 cm down in the hole! The rivet doesn't get close to the
bug....The paradox is not resolved."

Pentcho Valev


  #10  
Old February 18th 10, 04:14 AM posted to sci.logic,alt.philosophy,sci.astro,sci.math
Bappa
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE TO SPECIAL RELATIVITY

On Feb 18, 1:54*pm, Immortalist wrote:
On Feb 16, 1:26*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:





Theoretically, the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment can
be obtained by assuming that:


(A) The speed of light varies with the speed of the light source (c'=c
+v); the principle of relativity is correct; there are no miracles
(length contraction, time dilation).


(B) Einstein's 1905 light postulate (c'=c) is correct; the principle
of relativity is correct; there are miracles (length contraction, time
dilation).


There is no reasonable third alternative. That is, Newton's emission
theory of light with its constitutive equation c'=c+v is the ONLY
alternative to special relativity. Moreover, the emission theory is
TRUE *and special relativity FALSE unless one finds natural that a
long train can be trapped inside a short tunnel, an 80m long pole can
be trapped inside a 40m long barn and a bug can be both dead and
alive:


Wouldn't some pole traveling at the speed of light have quite a bit of
momentum?


0.5mcc of kinetic energy with respect to something travelling at speed
0, and mc for the momentum bit.

I think you need to revise the statement into a hypothetical
"If a barn was strong enough to stop a pole moving at the speed of
light the..."

Reminds me of some of this newer science fiction where they figure out
how to fire weapons at a ship traveling the speed of light.


If you too are travelling at the speed of light, that battle will be
like Trafalgar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Void_Trilogy



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSRIy...related&search


http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...barn_pole.html
"These are the props. You own a barn, 40m long, with automatic doors
at either end, that can be opened and closed simultaneously by a
switch. You also have a pole, 80m long, which of course won't fit in
the barn. Now someone takes the pole and tries to run (at nearly the
speed of light) through the barn with the pole horizontal. Special
Relativity (SR) says that a moving object is contracted in the
direction of motion: this is called the Lorentz Contraction. So, if
the pole is set in motion lengthwise, then it will contract in the
reference frame of a stationary observer.....So, as the pole passes
through the barn, there is an instant when it is completely within the
barn. At that instant, you close both doors simultaneously, with your
switch. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least
momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn. The
runner emerges from the far door unscathed.....If the doors are kept
shut the rod will obviously smash into the barn door at one end. If
the door withstands this the leading end of the rod will come to rest
in the frame of reference of the stationary observer. There can be no
such thing as a rigid rod in relativity so the trailing end will not
stop immediately and the rod will be compressed beyond the amount it
was Lorentz contracted. If it does not explode under the strain and it
is sufficiently elastic it will come to rest and start to spring back
to its natural shape but since it is too big for the barn the other
end is now going to crash into the back door and the rod will be
trapped in a compressed state inside the barn."


http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../bugrivet.html
"The bug-rivet paradox is a variation on the twin paradox and is
similar to the pole-barn paradox.....The end of the rivet hits the
bottom of the hole before the head of the rivet hits the wall. So it
looks like the bug is squashed.....All this is nonsense from the bug's
point of view. The rivet head hits the wall when the rivet end is just
0.35 cm down in the hole! The rivet doesn't get close to the
bug....The paradox is not resolved."


Pentcho Valev
- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WHO IS WELCOME TO TRY TO KILL SPECIAL RELATIVITY? Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 124 May 18th 09 03:13 PM
GENERAL RELATIVITY WITHOUT SPECIAL RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 12 January 1st 09 04:20 PM
Special Relativity in the 21st century Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 36 August 25th 08 04:03 PM
BLAMING SPECIAL RELATIVITY? Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 0 July 13th 08 01:05 PM
FOREVER SPECIAL RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 5 September 22nd 07 02:24 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.